]]>635040576000000000:FeedActivityKey:d9336f06-6655-4a88-af8a-383cdf49131fUserKey:slccomslccom commented on Employee Health Incentives: Myth or Miracle? http://www.workforce.com/article/20130508/NEWS02/130509982?plckFindCommentKey=CommentKey:bcd75ea2-6711-4be2-9275-6e424bd0bd6a Mon, 13 May 2013 20:34:25 GMT Even worse, with the very high and climbing cost of health "insurance" and copays and deductibles, very few of these people have a prayer of getting properly diagnosed and treated, in the few cases where there is effective treatment available.]]>635040576000000000:FeedActivityKey:3050005e-7549-4d64-ae85-5c407adf1579UserKey:slccomslccom posted to the discussion "Re: Would FMLA be approved for me?" http://www.workforce.com/forums?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aTopic+ForumsForum%3aForumId54Discussion%3a8e718c66-a080-47e9-abad-97c4ec40b204&plckFindPostKey=Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54Discussion:8e718c66-a080-47e9-abad-97c4ec40b204Post:fc69bebe-2e0b-4257-905b-eb8327675cef Sat, 09 Mar 2013 05:54:07 GMT634983840000000000:FeedActivityKey:5146c434-19c1-4438-b4e2-c1ee4ad59fb1UserKey:slccomslccom posted to the discussion "Re: What is OSHA checklist?" http://www.workforce.com/forums?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aTopic+ForumsForum%3aForumId54Discussion%3a9c7d0ad6-57f8-4dc4-bc53-37522d1fbf12&plckFindPostKey=Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54Discussion:9c7d0ad6-57f8-4dc4-bc53-37522d1fbf12Post:ff471c9a-b298-4f80-b09a-3d4e80571da7 Thu, 17 Jan 2013 05:56:55 GMT634939776000000000:FeedActivityKey:1945ae3c-d006-426c-94f1-6d7cd18d08caUserKey:slccomslccom posted to the discussion "Re: Guidance Needed - Physician's Note (not absence related)" http://www.workforce.com/forums?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aTopic+ForumsForum%3aForumId54Discussion%3af82088c2-6a33-44e1-9b27-934fa4407265&plckFindPostKey=Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54Discussion:f82088c2-6a33-44e1-9b27-934fa4407265Post:a5e517f9-a6ab-41e4-ae27-dd115c65a050 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 04:34:28 GMT634826592000000000:FeedActivityKey:ff936bb5-e350-4c15-a5dc-122d3eb62089UserKey:slccomslccom posted to the discussion "Re: Employee medical costs not covered by Worker's Compensation" http://www.workforce.com/forums?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aTopic+ForumsForum%3aForumId54Discussion%3ade5b38d3-2ccc-4327-a4d4-15b9ee760e39&plckFindPostKey=Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54Discussion:de5b38d3-2ccc-4327-a4d4-15b9ee760e39Post:941a6fc8-dd86-46da-9255-fe908324a023 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 04:22:27 GMTRe: Employee medical costs not covered by Worker's Compensation:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Employee medical costs not covered by Worker's Compensation : I understand your point .......but....... can you really decide in advance what to do? Would you really expect coworkers to wait, while the person has passed out, X number of minutes before calling for an ambulance? Is that reasonable? Consider the headline in the paper the next day when the person dies even though he asked you to wait. No legal liability? And is it really ok to tell all coworkers that the person suffers from certain medical conditions? Is it really proper for the person seeking accomodation to request how staff should respond to emergency situations? I am not an expert but these hypotheticals make me very uncomfortable.Posted by howard7[/QUOTE]

Howard, clearly you are priviliged to live without any major health conditions. Many people with epilepsy do not lose consciousness during their seizure, never mind have major convulsions. Many people with diabetes do not initially lose consciousness when their blood sugar falls. I believe that you will find that the majority prefer that those around them know when something is wrong so they can intervene (or not, depending.)

Very few people die of a seizure, and if those around them know what might happen, what to do, and how to react properly, the ambulance crew can continue their poker game unmolested unless it is a genuine emergency. We know what happens. We know what needs to be done. We prefer to educate those around us so that we are safe. My diabetic friends make sure that I know what to expect if their sugar is falling, and where they keep the hard candy for me to pop in their mouth before they black out. If they do black out, and/or fail to come out of it in a few minutes, I know to call for help. That seems far more "proper" to me than to have people just let the diabetic keep going into a coma. Way less disruptive for everyone, too.

My friends with epilepsy let me know that if they "zone out" and quit responding, they are having a seizure, and that I should keep an eye on them until they come out of it. And if it goes on beyond a certain time, to get medical help for them. And so on. Some people have seizure alert animals, or blood sugar alert animals so that they can handle things themselves most of the time. But they still need the people around them to be able to help them.

HR or the employer is NOT responsible for telling all employees. The person with the medical condition does, or at least, those with whom they spend the most time. When it is the person with the medical condition, there is no HIPAA issue. Generally, Good Samaritan laws protect coworkers. Get it in writing, and I fail to see how there would be a valid legal liability issue.

There are many other things that a lot of us let others know about. For example, I make darned sure that EVERYONE knows that I am hard of hearing. That keeps them from assuming that I am stupid instead. (Well, some of them, anyhow...) And that I have problems recognizing people until I have known them for a while. That way they don't (usually) assume that I am stuck-up or rude.

In a workplace where people are not uncomfortable with disabilities, and recognize that the few things you cannot do don't have anything to do with how excellent a job you can do, and where employers don't use pretexts to get rid of "undesirables," this kind of communication goes on freely. And everyone benefits.]]>634826592000000000:FeedActivityKey:d6b4ffd5-3725-462b-947f-7e4ae0903e16UserKey:slccomslccom posted to the discussion "Re: Employee medical costs not covered by Worker's Compensation" http://www.workforce.com/forums?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aTopic+ForumsForum%3aForumId54Discussion%3ade5b38d3-2ccc-4327-a4d4-15b9ee760e39&plckFindPostKey=Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54Discussion:de5b38d3-2ccc-4327-a4d4-15b9ee760e39Post:ef781c23-8165-4146-b55b-7d6cf67e69d5 Thu, 23 Aug 2012 17:41:23 GMTThere should be no HIPAA issues when the person with the disability issue raises their needs to not be transported to the hospital every single time unnecessarily.]]>634813236000000000:FeedActivityKey:0cafdb12-13fa-4acf-9af6-a16fce4d94daUserKey:slccomslccom posted to the discussion "Re: Employee medical costs not covered by Worker's Compensation" http://www.workforce.com/forums?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aTopic+ForumsForum%3aForumId54Discussion%3ade5b38d3-2ccc-4327-a4d4-15b9ee760e39&plckFindPostKey=Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54Discussion:de5b38d3-2ccc-4327-a4d4-15b9ee760e39Post:dd5dd168-a226-432a-9c5a-afd1aee00498 Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:45:34 GMTTalking with the employee about their problem, and seeing if you can get an understanding of when an ambulance should and should not be called would be a good start. I would talk with your attorney about this as well. I suspect that if you call an ambulance when it is clearly not indicated as discussed previously, there could be some liability.

You also need to seriously consider safety issues here. What is the employee's job? Is s/he working with machinery? Up on ladders? Driving? Unexpected unconsciousness can cause injury or death to the employee passing out, coworkers, bystanders and/or members of the general public, depending on job duties. I would have an additional discussion about this issue with your safety professionals, insurance carrier and attorney.]]>634807116000000000:FeedActivityKey:9124e374-949f-41f5-a7f9-398f175db42dUserKey:slccomslccom posted to the discussion "Re: Intermittent FMLA" http://www.workforce.com/forums?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aTopic+ForumsForum%3aForumId54Discussion%3acc29709d-5ed5-4a24-a559-b45227c3980a&plckFindPostKey=Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54Discussion:cc29709d-5ed5-4a24-a559-b45227c3980aPost:dfd05275-250b-4770-b0cc-253c3fca5586 Fri, 18 May 2012 23:44:43 GMTRe: Intermittent FMLA:[QUOTE]In answer to SLCOM and NORK4: Here are the facts: a. She is in school. She did ask to be transferred to 2nd shift about 6 months ago and request was denied due to lack of work. b. We know her class schedule c. We know she has been in class (since she is attending school with a coworkers wife) d. We do have a policy that requires a doctor's note after 3 days of absence. e. Her performance has deteriorated and is being documented - too many returns and/or not passing quality testing (she was an excellent worker in the past). Given these facts we are planning to confront her and to get a 2nd opinion on her condition (migraine) and if required on a mutually agreed 3rd opinion which I understand is binding.Posted by evabraham[/QUOTE]

Sure sounds like abuse to me, too. Thanks for the additional info.]]>634729644000000000:FeedActivityKey:88aea973-b8ee-4afa-a398-0e81b7a533f8UserKey:slccomslccom posted to the discussion "Re: Intermittent FMLA" http://www.workforce.com/forums?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aTopic+ForumsForum%3aForumId54Discussion%3acc29709d-5ed5-4a24-a559-b45227c3980a&plckFindPostKey=Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54Discussion:cc29709d-5ed5-4a24-a559-b45227c3980aPost:176d844f-51c0-430d-8003-317d66b55c55 Fri, 18 May 2012 17:59:44 GMTRe: Intermittent FMLA:[QUOTE]slccom: I don't think I'm reading eva's original post the way you are. For one thing, eva states that the employee takes 2 days to avoid having to bring in a doctor's note; not, as you assert, to avoid seeing a doctor [apparently, eva's company has a policy, as do many, that absences of 3 consecutive days require a doctor's excuse]. While it's possible that the employee is truly ill, it's also quite possible that the employee is indeed abusing FMLA. It happens. If the employer suspects abuse of FMLA, the employer is perfectly within its rights to request another medical opinion.Posted by nork4[/QUOTE]

It does not appear to me that Eva's company has explored the possibility that the employee is indeed ill, either. I realize that abuse happens. It is always a good idea to take a long look in the mirror before making assumptions which are usually if not wholly wrong, at least partly wrong.]]>634729428000000000:FeedActivityKey:7ebcbbea-fb2e-425f-8f2b-880150676b89UserKey:slccomslccom posted to the discussion "Re: Intermittent FMLA" http://www.workforce.com/forums?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aTopic+ForumsForum%3aForumId54Discussion%3acc29709d-5ed5-4a24-a559-b45227c3980a&plckFindPostKey=Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54Discussion:cc29709d-5ed5-4a24-a559-b45227c3980aPost:927ebec6-479e-458d-8f8b-0a5a86fc0614 Fri, 18 May 2012 04:46:47 GMTRe: Intermittent FMLA:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Intermittent FMLA : Howard, That is a good question. Quality and quantity has definitely declined but as my Manager says - I do not want to see the company name in the newsletters as an example of how not to mess with FMLA. Unfortunately this has not been documented so far and starting to documenting it now will look like we are looking for reasons to get rid of her. Major issues are being documented however and there havent been enough of those to justify termination as we do give second, third and fourth chances to all employees. LizPosted by evabraham[/QUOTE]

Has quality really declined, or is it possible that this is a perception of a manager who is unhappy with the employee? There need to be some objective measures, and decline should be documented. Has there been any exploration of reasonable accommodations? Perhaps some changes would allow this employee to return to previous levels if, indeed, production really has fallen. Can coworkers be working to undermine this employee because they (and you) rather clearly don't believe that this employee is really ill, and that is why quantity has fallen?

Why do you assume that this employee is taking just two days at a time to avoid having to see a doctor? Is there any evidence of that? Is it possible that s/he is trying to minimize time away to reduce disruption for the employer?

Perhaps it is time to explore the story you are telling yourselves about this employee and use Crucial Conversations tools to validate perceptions. There are many illnesses that leave the victim looking perfectly healthy while destroying them from within. For many people, fatigue requires a bit of rest, and a day or two can be enough. The danger of an IME is that many ignorant doctors quite simply "don't believe in" these illnesses, and while that may satisfy the employer, things could get ugly down the road.

I know many people who have these invisible illnesses, and the lengths they go to to remain employed are amazing. Many will go to work, work the best they can, then come home and go to sleep until time to start all over again. They try very hard to continue to do the excellent work they used to and help the employer. Too often, management starts resenting their time away and actively undermines them, often with the eager assistance of coworkers, The result is a lose-lose situation. The employer loses a valuable employee who is going the extra hundred miles, and the employee loses their source of health insurance, self-esteem, and best reason to get out of bed in the morning.

And some times, the employer gains a lawsuit, with all the attendant expense and publicity.]]>634728960000000000:FeedActivityKey:928cf041-c9ef-4872-972e-3115bbd22cdbUserKey:slccomslccom posted to the discussion "Re: HIV Status Disclosure" http://www.workforce.com/forums?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aTopic+ForumsForum%3aForumId54Discussion%3a7cbb4594-f481-40aa-b3aa-4304a4157522&plckFindPostKey=Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54Discussion:7cbb4594-f481-40aa-b3aa-4304a4157522Post:bed003cc-80a6-4b3b-a19f-0d4dad1507c8 Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:33:47 GMT634638024000000000:FeedActivityKey:9d70ff44-8704-4932-b2c0-f9d43760a8afUserKey:slccomslccom posted to the discussion "Re: Disability during an Emergency" http://www.workforce.com/forums?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aTopic+ForumsForum%3aForumId54Discussion%3a6f00a8a0-8483-444c-b378-2ccf556b3e21&plckFindPostKey=Cat:Topic ForumsForum:ForumId54Discussion:6f00a8a0-8483-444c-b378-2ccf556b3e21Post:abe7146b-a2e1-4947-b7be-227fa2b9ebc9 Sat, 22 Oct 2011 05:26:43 GMTRe: Disability during an Emergency:[QUOTE]I would check with the building mgmt company, because I doubt having a chair on the landing would be any safer than her going down on her rear end. Either way space will be blocked. If people are moving fast, I could see her getting pushed out of her chair or accidentally down the stairs. How many flights of stairs is it? And how many more above you? That said, if I were her, there is no way I would wait for emergency personnel if I could get myself down at all. And yes, I would go down on my rear end. Better down than waiting. (I just have too much knowledge of 9/11 and people dying because they were told to stay up there until personnel could get to the top). I think any scenario has liability attached to it because she is disabled/slower than an average person. If she is forced to stay there and isnt' allowed out in the one way she CAN get out, that could also be an issue if she doesn't get out in time...i.e. the employer/building mgmt are liable for her death/any negative repercussions. The only real scenario I can see is to have her go down on her rear with someone else accompanying her to help with the bottleneck....As it is you will have some slower employees that bottleneck and some faster. You could have her and a buddy be the last two out from your floor and wait until most have already gone down from upper floors. I would definitely practice it both ways and see how long it takes either way. Which gets her out safely the fastest along with the others.Posted by rrupert[/QUOTE]

There are evacuation chairs available that a single person can operate. They fold up for easiy storage. I strongly recommend that building management get at least one of these, that it be kept on the floor this employee is on, and people practice with it. And since there is no written guarantee that other people won't break a leg or otherwise become incapacitated during the incident, there should be at least one on each floor. ]]>634548420000000000:FeedActivityKey:daf3c2c0-7bc0-4243-9b1e-013128abd5daUserKey:slccom